Ouch! Paris Review “Unaccepts” Work
July 20th, 2010 § 16 Comments
Brevity has been taking a few hits in the last week for our consideration of a reading fee, and Narrative has been taking some decent hits for having such a pricey reading fee, and Tin House took a few hits earlier in the month for suggesting we all buy books from indie bookstores (and send them the receipt), but I’m guessing the heat is about to turn elsewhere for a day or two.
The Paris Review, in changing poetry editors, is now “un-accepting” previously accepted poems. 
We feel for the authors.
Literary publishing has always been a precarious proposition, but as more than a few of you have pointed out on this blog over the last few days, we are entering into interesting, perhaps even more precarious, times.
See Daniel Nester’s full coverage of this event here.
The only reason I can see for a literary magazine to do something like this would be if the mag lost its funding and had to fold before it could print the issue; but even then, and especially in this case, there are MANY other options for dealing with a backlog of accepted work–i.e. a double issue or anthology like or now a downloadable PDF or e-book “special” edition. If it’s a matter of one Editor disagreeing with the aesthetic taste of the previous editor, that doesn’t seem like a conflict that should be pushed off on writers. PR should bit the bullet on that one, I think. I also don’t believe this is something that happens regularly; or perhaps I should say that as an Editor and (more importantly) another writer, I WANT to believe this doesn’t happen regularly.
[...] Or maybe the Paris Review has just gone to hell in a hand basket after the death of George Plimpton. Brevity has been taking a few hits in the last week for our consideration of a reading fee, and Narrative has been taking some decent hits for having such a pricey reading fee, and Tin House took a few hits earlier in the month for suggesting we all buy books from indie bookstores (and send them the receipt), but I'm guessing the heat is about to turn elsewhere for a day or two. The Paris Review, in changing poetry editors, is now "un-accepting" … Read More [...]
Someone needs to publish the Rejections Collection- perhaps on-line? I would happily subscribe to it. I can understand wanting to put your own stamp on the Review, but this seems disrespectful.
Mary, that is a BRILLIANT idea. How can we get our hands on those poems, I wonder.
Ah…the Lord giveth and the Lord laketh away. It does seem that some rule about integrity has been broken here.
I really can’t say anything else yet other than I’m floored. That’s just … who does this to its writers?
I’m with you, Michael. I can’t muster up any intelligent response, and am left with: “Are you f-ing kidding me?”
I love Mary’s suggestion. In fact, I think it’s time for a Salon des Refuses of work scorned in such elitest terms. I’m most definitely onboard with this.
Daniel Nester has posted Part 2:
http://wewhoareabouttodie.com/2010/07/20/behind-the-scenes-at-the-great-paris-review-poetry-purge-of-2010-part-2/
It doesn’t say much for respecting former editors, does it? or putting the needs of the journal above the aesthetic footprint of the new editor? This happened to me with CrazyHorse almost 30 years ago, and it still stinks. I’m sure if a new editor wants to make a good first impression with readers and others, respect might be a place to start.
This is so wrong in so many ways. I’m stunned. As others have pointed out, there were several options to make this transition happen with integrity.
I posted this on Nester’s site, too. My memory says Tom Clark did the same when he took over after Yvor Winters’ tenure. They didn’t notify anybody either. But that was a major generational change at the time.
I demand more interesting rejection letters and therefore even more creative de-acceptance letters. Nuff said.
While I wouldn’t of course guarantee that you’ll get one, we at The Normal School send out a sticker that says, “I’ve Been Rejected by The Normal School,” which was intended to be a little more interesting and fun than the standard form rejection, akin to the Georgia Review’s old bumper sticker with the “I’ve been __ Rejected __ Accepted by GR” line (but which has not been without its detractors . . . maybe fodder for a future blog post?). We’ve even been approached by a sticker collector asking for copies of it. Some folks have sent us pictures of the sticker. We kind of like it.
[...] complain about it. Heck, I have even heard poets defending The Paris Review’s recent decision to “unaccept” a bunch of poems. We know where we are on the food chain: at the [...]
All I can muster for this is a “WTF, mate?”
If I was the former editor of Paris Review, I would be deeply offended. If I was a writer who submitted to them and was rejected as some kind of pawn in the regime change, I doubt I would submit to them again.
Frankly, this kind of thing is ridiculous and insulting to all involved.